This workshop is the first in a row of three international and multidisciplinary exercises, intended to mobilize opinions and produce new knowledge within the research project: “Mapping for Change? Critical cartography approaches to drive socio-environmental urban transformations”. The project is funded by the Volkswagen Stiftung and docked at K LAB.

In this project we examine variegated examples of contemporary critical mappings that target socio-environmental urban issues, and investigate particularly their Strategies, Tactics and Typologies (STTs) and therewith their level of influence. We do not attempt to categorize these works, rather, aim to identify ‘new’ transdisciplinary approaches for the cumulation and layering of different mapping STTs, and thereupon their potentials to support different stakeholders to navigate contemporary complexities and tackle urban polycrises. This workshop brings together a multidisciplinary group of scholars and craftswo/men in an interactive program to explore three dimensions that we found recurrent in our study of critical mappings; which are:

1. The deconstruction of DICHOTOMIES, both in content and in processes of production (the ‘making of’). The technical parameters that dictate that chosen data must be jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive very often lead to the simplification of layered complexities (for instance, this is typical of UN approaches). Yet, how can these be approached differently, re-negotiated and improved? Does producing a glossary of false dichotomies for both content and processes help nurture critical views and understandings of the roles of mapping? Are there any modes for employing different STTs that can lead to shifting paradigms? What other ideas exist on this issue?

2. The employment of SCAPES – Arjun Appadurai describes scapes as “deeply perspectival constructs” formed through the situatedness and subjectivists of different actors, and therein are multi-layered, topographical, and dynamic. Some argue that scapes require a systems-approach and as a concept account for material, social and cultural elements. Since contemporary social and environmental crises are complex, the approach of scapes could help in outlining and navigating complexities. Yet, is ‘scapes’ a useful approach or just a trendy concept? What are ways to operationalize scapes through mapping in general and STTs in particular? Is the scapes approach producing ‘new’ results or merely adding to the plurality of view points?

3. A focus on CRAFTSWO/MANSHIP. Richard Sennett describes craftsmanship as a quality that is embedded in the making, as an additive skill that is developed in (1) the rhythm of explicit reconsidering and tacit knowledge development, learning many ways to perform one activity as opposed to monochromatism; (2) in the process of problem-solving, taking away the notions of closure and truth, and (3) in slow time, learning to dwell on the things we do. Yet, who are the craftswo/men of contemporary cartography? What is the role of craftswo/manship in cartography in the digital age? What happens if we see a map not as an object but as a performance, and further, as a performance of (socio-political) subjectivities?